Re: Long term database archival
От | Agent M |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Long term database archival |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2440e796820f6c0a349dbb8057a94214@themactionfaction.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Long term database archival ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Long term database archival
Re: Long term database archival |
Список | pgsql-general |
Will postgresql be a viable database in 20 years? Will SQL be used anywhere in 20 years? Are you sure 20 years is your ideal backup duration? Very few media even last 5 years. The good thing about open source and open standards is that regardless of the answers to those questions, there is no proprietary element to prevent you from accessing that data- simply decide what it will be and update your backups along the way. Whether such data will be relevant/ useful to anyone in 20 years is a question you have to answer yourself. Good luck. -M On Jul 6, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > Hi, > > What is the best pg_dump format for long-term database > archival? That is, what format is most likely to > be able to be restored into a future PostgreSQL > cluster. > > Mostly, we're interested in dumps done with > --data-only, and have preferred the > default (-F c) format. But this form is somewhat more > opaque than a plain text SQL dump, which is bound > to be supported forever "out of the box". > Should we want to restore a 20 year old backup > nobody's going to want to be messing around with > decoding a "custom" format dump if it does not > just load all by itself. > > Is the answer different if we're dumping the > schema as well as the data? > > Thanks. ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ AgentM agentm@themactionfaction.com ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬ ¬
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: